Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Tui/Thomson ONLY

User4815

111KAB wrote: »

Spanish NEB will rule in your favour but their assistance, unfortunately, not worth the paper it is written on as Judge (if you go to Court) will ignore as their (NEB) opinion carries no weight in Court. So I'm afraid if you wish to pursue it is Court action. Good luck!

Thanks for reply.

Not to sound rude but why are these bodies even in existance if they are of no use? Say, I do get a favourable reply - then why don't I just get the compensation I am owed there and then?

User4815

blondmark wrote: »

Actually, if you speak Spanish, you should find it easier claiming from Spain under the European Small Claims Procedure (Form A). There is a place on the form asking where you would like the claim to be heard (Spain) and whether you would like the case decided in a hearing or on the papers (on the papers).

Best of luck!

Unfortunately, I do not speak a word of Spanish and I do not think I could put my trust into Google translate that much

111KAB

User4815 wrote: »

Not to sound rude but why are these bodies even in existance if they are of no use? Say, I do get a favourable reply - then why don't I just get the compensation I am owed there and then?

Not rude ... I totally agree but if airlines don't agree with NEB 'advise' then only alternative is to take matter to Court (or walk away) and Spanish NEB (in this case) have no jurisdiction over UK courts.

User4815

111KAB wrote: »

Not rude ... I totally agree but if airlines don't agree with NEB 'advise' then only alternative is to take matter to Court (or walk away) and Spanish NEB (in this case) have no jurisdiction over UK courts.

Cheers, not sure if above applies in Eire but most likely does. I will contact our aviation body again to see what they say. Their first response was to fob me off to Spain so I'm not expecting any miracles

spaceaarvark

Received the settlement for my claim today :j

Thomson original defence said the aircraft "was subjected to an unexpected technical fault, namely a problem with the aircraft's pylon panel".

I have no idea what a pylon panel is, but the pilot had told us that a spot check by the Turin authorities had identified "an incorrect bolt had been used somewhere on the aircraft" and they would not let us take off until this had been rectified (11½ hours later); presumably this bolt was holding the pylon panel.

In a way I was hoping this would get to court so that we could go deeper into the nature of the "unexpected technical fault" and all have a jolly good laugh!

spaceaarvark

A question following the settlement of my claim:

I started the claim through MCOL and then had it transferred to my local court; who do I have to inform that I now wish to withdraw the claim?

The MCOL help facility says "You need to tell the Money Claim Online helpdesk if you made the claim online". But if you 'phone them and choose the "I have been paid" option you just get a recorded message saying you should email them. Obviously I can email them to say the claim has been settled, but should I be informing my local court as well? At this point the MCOL process seems a bit woolly!

111KAB

spaceaarvark wrote: »

A question following the settlement of my claim:

I started the claim through MCOL and then had it transferred to my local court; who do I have to inform that I now wish to withdraw the claim?

Inform local court and if you have paid hearing fee and no less than 7 days before hearing you can request return of fee.

romanby1

blondmark wrote: »

So I look forward to my day in court next month. Apparently they're treating me to a specialist aviation law barrister from 1 Chancery Lane chambers.

Sounds like a fun day out. :cool:

Also sounds to me they are trying to put the frighteners on you. Unless your case is being heard close to London it will be a very expensive day out for them if your case is a good one and they loose.
In our case they denied responsibility for 30 months and then 21 days before the court date emailed an offer which we then negotiated on with some minor points in particular that payment was in our bank by the end of the week or we would be submitting the papers to the court for judgement. The payment was in our account the next day.

phritchie

spaceaarvark wrote: »

Received the settlement for my claim today :j

Thomson original defence said the aircraft "was subjected to an unexpected technical fault, namely a problem with the aircraft's pylon panel".

I have no idea what a pylon panel is, but the pilot had told us that a spot check by the Turin authorities had identified "an incorrect bolt had been used somewhere on the aircraft" and they would not let us take off until this had been rectified (11½ hours later); presumably this bolt was holding the pylon panel.

In a way I was hoping this would get to court so that we could go deeper into the nature of the "unexpected technical fault" and all have a jolly good laugh!

You say your flight was in 2009? Did you first submit your claim a while ago and it's only come to court now? Or did you also get the 'two year claim limit' nonsense and have now got a result? This is the only excuse Thomson have given me so far, and I'm waiting to see if they are caving in to it.

1967lor

Centipede100 wrote: »

You have the usual excuse of ECs from the airline. Read the FAQs on page 1 for details of what to do next but usually this is a NBA followed by the issue of a legal claim.

thanks for replying, I have checked stats and it says my flight tom 533 was cancelled yet the letter from Thomson says delayed, the flight we took the following morning is not on the stats, does anyone know why, as I would love to find it. cheers